A Solution-Oriented Approach

A Solution-Oriented Approach

1989 3 March 20-24 A Solution-Oriented Approach (1660) Probably the most important event of the current year is the inception of a new spirit of accommodation between the USSR and the USA. Time magazine (May 30, 1988) has aptly defined it as a ‘grand compromise.’

Reckoned as super powers, the USSR and the USA are rivals of 70 years standing, with a long history of repeated confrontations. The media of both blocs, in keeping up a steady flow of reciprocal condemnation, has played a significant role in aggravating the situation. But now, after this marathon of accusation and counteraccusation, both powers are – miraculously – beginning to talk of peace. Instead of relentlessly pursuing the arms race, they are at last giving their much-needed attention to what appear to be fruitful negotiations on the de-escalation of international tensions.

A Soviet official has described this new policy as ‘solution-oriented.’ Where, hitherto, each blocs had been out to paint the iniquities of the other in the blackest of hues, both are now glossing them over in their new fervour of finding solutions to mutual problems.

This thaw, which is at present taking place in the long-standing cold war between the USSR and the USA, has a great lesson in it for other nations. Surely, if the policy of headlong confrontation has become such a costly procedure that even the super powers can no longer afford it, it should be obvious that the smaller nations are even less well-equipped to pursue so ultimately destructive a course.

Towards Realism

While Nikita Krushchev was First Secretary of the Central Communist Party of the USSR (1958-1964), he made known his, and his countrymen’s feelings towards the capitalist world when he uttered his now well-known threat: ‘We will bury you.” (Hindustan Times, June 28, 1988)

In the same vein, American President Ronald Reagan dubbed the Soviet union an ‘evil empire’ and American officials boasted that they would push the Soviet Union into the sea.” However, in spite of these periodic, aggressive face-offs, and after 70 years of socialist revolution, the countries of both blocs have at last seen a change of outlook as an overwhelming imperative, and American leaders have begun visiting Moscow for negotiations. Ronald Reagan himself visited Moscow from June 28 to July 2, 1988, despite his previous view that such a visit was out of the question. Before his visit, he went on record as saying that US relations with Moscow “must be guided by realism”. (Hindus tan Times, May 26, 1988)

The arms race has been going on between the two countries now for 40 years. While both countries had been going all out to make the deadliest weapons in history with the avowed intention of destroying one another, today they are themselves placing curbs upon their own manufacture and acquisition of weapons, and are even destroying certain categories of weapons which are already major items in their respective stockpiles. The Times of India of August 3 (Section 2, p.1) reports that the Soviet Union today destroyed four shorter range missiles, OTR-22, at the test range in Saryozek, 200 Km north west of Alma Ata. The dismantling was carried out in accordance with the INF treaty signed between Mr. Mikhail Gorbachev and President Reagan. The missiles were destroyed in the presence of a US inspection team. Representatives from various countries, including India, and other international non-government organization were also present.

The Soviets will dismantle 1752 deployed and stored missiles, having a range of 500 Km to 5500 Km, in three years. The US will eliminate 859 such missiles.”

Cause of Change

We do not have to go far to find the reason for this dramatic change in the super power’s policy. It is simply that in their attempt to gain the upperhand in all that has to do with arms supremacy they had – wittingly or unwittingly– allowed the progress of their respective countries to come to a standstill. After a relentless weapons race, which a fear-ridden, blame-oriented psychology had prolonged for half a century, they have come to the conclusion, when all is said and done, that the continued adoption of such a course could produce only negative results. It has finally dawned on them that, in attempting to destroy the ‘enemy’, they have brought their own countries to the very brink of annihilation.

A Reversal of Policy

It is ironic that the USA’s insistence on arms superiority has caused it to fall behind its old, conquered enemy, Japan, in the economic field. Today, the US is the world’s largest debtor with a net foreign debt of $400 billion, while Japan is the world’s largest creditor, with a net foreign investment of $240 billion. This year, Japan had budgeted for $10 billion as foreign aid, displacing the US ($ 92.2 billion) as the world’s most generous donor. The American dollar, which once reigned supreme in the economic world no longer enjoys that position. Economists are even asking, “Can America maintain its superpower status?”

In an interview (Times of India, August 9,1988) Mr. Henry Kissinger observed that “the fundamental new fact will be the emergence of new power centres. China and India Will become more powerful. Japan is daily growing stronger.... so the United States will have to adjust to having other countries, that in the past it had a tendency to ignore, pursue more active policies.”

The 19th All-Union Party Conference, held in the last week of June, 1988, in Moscow, was attended by 5000 delegates from all over the Soviet Union. On this occasion, the Soviet Prime Minister, Mikhail Gorbachev made a three and a half hour speech, which has been ably summarized by Mr. Quentin Peel, a journalist who not only heard the speeches of the Soviet leaders, but also had meetings with them. Peel says, “The message seemed plain enough, the party would have to renounce its stifling role in the administration and economy of the country. Power and privilege would have to be curbed, and science and initiative given their head if the Soviet Union were to compete with the rest of the world, let alone be a superpower.” (Times of India, July 5, 1988)

Perestroika

Repeated failures to achieve, or even identify such production targets as would satisfy the requirements of the many peoples who make up the Soviet Union have compelled Mr. Gorbachev to bow to economic realities. Setting aside notions of Socialistic superiority, (the Soviets considered themselves superior to others because of their Socialistic set-up) he had launched a campaign to change the prevailing system in the USSR. The keynotes of this policy are glasnost and perestroika, Russian words which mean respectively ‘openness’ and ‘restructuring’. Mr. Gorbachev goes into the practical details of this policy in a book which has been published in English under the title of Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World.

This new movement is bringing about changes in the Socialist structure of the USSR, which can only be described as revolutionary. Its basic policy includes everything from religious freedom to the development of friendly relations with the Soviets’ traditional arch enemy, the USA.

Newspaper reports of these recent trends are heartening. Roy Gutman’s account, originally published in the Los Angeles Times – Washington Post News Service, and relayed to Indian readers by the Hindustan Times (January 16, 1988) is entitled ‘Kremlin, White House Now Realistic’ (p.20). This report reveals just how historic has been the shift in US-Soviet relations in the wake of recent events. New thinking having emerged in both countries, the Kremlin and the White House are both becoming more open-minded about each other’s affairs.

The extent to which attitudes are softening is illustrated by a Mr. Bessmertnykh, a veteran diplomat who served 12 years in the United States. In an interview with Newsday he said that the American administration had been fond of making such statements as: ‘We shall draw the line, we shall go to the source, we shall stop the advance of communism.’ “But now,” said Mr. Bessmertnykh, “people have realized that the world has changed. You can’t do it any more that way. It’s impossible. Now both sides are becoming realistic. Their team and our team are both solution-oriented.”

Conclusion

This change in the relationship between the USSR and America is of incalculable importance. The dropping of the policy of confrontation as being untenable from all points of view – moral, social, religious, economic, political – is one of the best lessons modern history has to give to mankind.

If the passing of unfavourable judgments on, and eternally remaining at loggerheads with the ‘enemy’ have ultimately been recognized as utterly futile pursuits by the world’s two super powers, is it not the most basic common sense for the less developed countries (such as India and Pakistan) to try to improve the general tenor of their relations with disaffected nations who could, with a more rational approach, be won ever as friends?

Wisdom, in today’s global context, lies in being constructive, rather than in constantly plotting the downfall of others. Raising a great hue and cry over issue which could be peaceably resolved at the negotiating table only means the squandering of precious time and energy, which would be better devoted to bringing about national uplift.

It is high time we scrapped all blame-oriented policies, whether internal or international, in favour of solution-oriented policies. Herein lies the secret of success and progress.

AL-RISALA (English)

An announcement was made in the last issue of Al-Risala that because of lack of funds the publication was being discontinued. A large number of readers have, however, expressed great concern over this decision and have urged that the magazine should continue. In deference to the wishes of our esteemed readers we have therefore decided to continue publication for the time being.

It’s continued publication however depends upon the monetary support of our readers and well-wishers. We therefore appeal for the support and generosity of all to participate in this cause for sustaining the Dawah work that is being done by this journal.